Discussions on Formal Sentencing Hearing - Jodi Arias #9

[Hatfield]

IMO if they do find an error in her appeal ( that's doubtful) i think it will be a harmless error or an error that wouldn't have resulted in a different verdict. I just cannot see them overturning the conviction. I really think it'll be affirmed and that's that and jodi will be on her own.

I agree.

I think most of her appeals will not even be heard. I think they will most likely reject them upfront for some legal reason.

 

[ElleElle]

:gaah:

I hate the way Dr. F says "Mr. Martinez" and how many sidebars? Why I am torturing myself?

 

[fifteen89]

Reading the manifesto. Parts of this thing are quite amusing. Like she wanted to conquer her fear of speaking in public. Apparently 18 days on the stand in the first trial didn't work because she had to testify in secret this time around.

Also interesting that in the 2-perp ninja story she says: "...I managed to get to my feet and go into the closet, hoping to get through the other door and possibly to a telephone, I don’t know. My capacity to think was diminished....."

I guess her capacity to think was so diminished that she forgot to jump up on the shelf and grab the gun Travis kept on the top shelf in his closet But yet she thought to go through the other door to get to a phone??

 

[ElleElle]

"Objection, asked and answered" means "you already asked that question and I frankly liked the answer the witness gave before and I don't want you to have the chance to ask it again and maybe get an answer I don't like as much."

Thanks! :wave:

How about, "Objection, improper privilege" ?

 

[AZlawyer]

Thanks! :wave:

How about, "Objection, improper privilege" ?

"Objection, improper premise" maybe? Or "objection privileged" but I don't think that would have come up.

Improper premise means that the question assumes something is true that the witness hasn't admitted to. Like "when did you stop beating your wife?"

 

[Nancy_Drew]

And for this advice, all donations should be sent to P.O. Box 00I812. Cash only should be sent, wrapped in toblerone wrappers . Give, give til' it hurts. :shame:

:floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

 

[ElleElle]

"Objection, improper premise" maybe? Or "objection privileged" but I don't think that would have come up.

Improper premise means that the question assumes something is true that the witness hasn't admitted to. Like "when did you stop beating your wife?"

Juan is crossing Dr. F and that is Nurmi's objection several times. It sounds like "improper privilege(d)" but I can be mishearing.

 

[AZlawyer]

Juan is crossing Dr. F and that is Nurmi's objection several times. It sounds like "improper privilege(d)" but I can be mishearing.

Hmm. Give me an example of one of the questions. Nothing should have been privileged with a testifying expert.

 

[NashBridges2]

BTW, a poster on here had posted awhile back that MDLR was being investigated. She called it correctly and had the source. So, I believe what @JuansTie has written about. Just me. IMO

Sure, there could be some truth to it. I've also read that juror 17 relationship with juan is being investigated. Yet, I've seen no evidence other than people saying "it's being investigated".

Show me some proof. Until then, it's just more Jodi land drama and gossip.

 

[NashBridges2]

Thanks! :wave:

How about, "Objection, improper privilege" ?

I give you credit for even watching. I can't bring myself to do it. I watched the whole circus where judge had the CONVICTED MURDERER , do her practice walk across the courtroom like she was in some beauty pagent or fashion show and that was all I could stomach.

 

[ElleElle]

Hmm. Give me an example of one of the questions. Nothing should have been privileged with a testifying expert.

Start at 14:00 mins. of Juan vs. Dr. F.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DASqsVuK_aI

ETA ~ It has to do with the Helio phone being stolen and the sex tape recording and if Dr. F would change her mind about it if JA lied about the Helio being stolen.

 

[NashBridges2]

Dec 4, 2014, the *cough cough* National Enquirer reported that ja had raised nearly $40,000 for her appeal. That would definitely be a "significant amount" like she told Troy Hayden.

Jeepers, crazy is as crazy does. My money is on her mom, her aunt or her sister.

 

[FelicityLemon]

Thanks! :wave:

How about, "Objection, improper privilege" ?

I thought you were making a funny as in "The defense is getting improper privileges" :/

 

[ElleElle]

I give you credit for even watching. I can't bring myself to do it. I watched the whole circus where judge had the CONVICTED MURDERER , do her practice walk across the courtroom like she was in some beauty pagent or fashion show and that was all I could stomach.

I only can stomach Juan crossing, that's about it.

 

[AZlawyer]

Start at 14:00 mins. of Juan vs. Dr. F.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DASqsVuK_aI

First objection I hear is "objection, mischaracterizes her testimony," which means that Nurmi thinks Juan is claiming Dr. F said something she didn't really say.

ETA: This objection is generally used to signal the witness to say "that's not exactly what I said."

 

[ElleElle]

First objection I hear is "objection, mischaracterizes her testimony," which means that Nurmi thinks Juan is claiming Dr. F said something she didn't really say.

ETA: This objection is generally used to signal the witness to say "that's not exactly what I said."

Right, I guess it was right before the 14 min mark, but it's all good, thanks your expertise.

 

[ElleElle]

:lol:

Juan: "JA must be in heat" ... when talking about the dildo with a heartbeat.
Jury to disregard. :lol:

 

[AZlawyer]

Right, I guess it was right before the 14 min mark, but it's all good, thanks your expertise.

OK, just before the 14 min. mark Juan asks if Dr. F was told that the conversation was from a phone reported stolen. Nurmi says "objection, relevance, privilege." He's making 2 separate objections there. "Relevance" means Nurmi doesn't think it matters one way or the other whether the phone was reported stolen. "Privilege" means, apparently, that Nurmi thinks his conversations with Dr. F are confidential. Which they are not.

 

[GigiG]

TAs response to the Hughes' letter, with Nurmi - DR. F

Starts pretty much right away.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Gw1WaqKUQk

Wow! This video is eye-opening for me. You can hear and see in your mind's eye how Jodi has already hooked her talons into Travis' heart and soul. The manipulation has already begun.

His own words also reveal his conflicted feelings regarding Deanna. Which makes me wonder if those feelings were true, or just due to manipulations; a side-effect of the drug he was addicted to, aka Jodi Arias.

 

[Mindmatters]

Juan is crossing Dr. F and that is Nurmi's objection several times. It sounds like "improper privilege(d)" but I can be mishearing.

He is saying privileged Elle. He is referring to privileged information, i.e., something that is supposed to be confidential (at least from what I can discern) that Juan is questioning her about. Don't know how Juan would be in possession of such documents but he had her read the heading of one of the documents and MF kept acting dense and saying I don't know I never see these privileged attorney communications (or something to that effect)

ETA: I see AZL has answered, and much better too!